"TV meteorologists have as much, if not more, opportunity to talk to the American public about climate change than anyone," said Daniel Souweine, director of the Forecast the Facts drive.

"Ultimately, our goal is to change how the entire profession of meteorology reports on climate change," Souweine said.

Specifically, he suggested, when a region is in the midst of a drought or heat wave, it is important to discuss the role climate change plays in amplifying such an event.

More Information

Forecasters, climatologists differ

None of Houston's TV meteorologists made Forecast the Fact's list of some four dozen television forecasters who are "deniers" of climate change. In their own words, here are the views of three of them on climate change.

Frank Billingsley: I appreciate the complexity of climate and "science" is, after all, from the Greek word "to know" and until we really have a consensus of what we "know" then scientists tend toward skepticism. Saying that, we do know that our world population is growing exponentially and we have every reason to believe that humankind will be here awhile, so the responsible attitude is to work toward fewer greenhouse gas emissions and clean up our atmosphere for the generations to come.

Tim Heller: You wouldn't ask your dentist about your gallbladder and you shouldn't ask your local TV weatherman about climate change. Operational meteorologists and forecasters are not climatologists. The background education is somewhat similar but our area of expertise is different. I remember being at an AMS Broadcast Conference a few years ago and the subject of climate change was being vigorously discussed. The man leading the discussion asked the group how many had read the complete IPCC report, not just the summary but the complete report. Out of 150 or so TV weather folks, less than a dozen raised their hands.

Gene Norman: I do see changes in weather patterns and increases in extreme weather, but the linkage to human activity isn't fully clear to me. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas, but so is water vapor, a gas that is poorly accounted for in global climate models. Sadly, the issue has become politicized for some reason and "dissenting voices" are discouraged. I've always thought of science as the pursuit of understanding natural phenomenon based on measurement with experimentation to prove or disprove a hypothesis.

Turning up the volume

None of Houston's television forecasters made the campaign's list of "deniers," but it has nevertheless turned up the volume on the issue of climate change and tele­vision meteorology.

Local forecaster Gene Norman of KHOU (Channel 11) said he doesn't welcome being dragged into what he calls the politicization of climate science.

"I'm concerned about this 'Forecast The Facts' campaign and the underlying assumption that TV meteorologists are somehow misleading the public and are espousing some kind of scientific heresy," Norman said.

The first survey found that 63 percent of tele­vision forecasters attributed global warming to natural causes, while just 31 percent believed it was mostly brought about by human activity. More than one-quarter of respondents called global warming a "scam."

A survey of television weather­casters last summer found that 19 percent attributed climate change to mostly human causes, 29 percent to mostly natural causes, and 34 percent to some of both. The remainder declared themselves either unconvinced or undecided.

These views are in stark contrast to those of atmospheric scientists who study climate change, a clear majority of whom attribute the bulk of the warming over the last century to human activity.

Nevertheless, the effort to ostracize "denier" television meteorologists has come under fire.

Jason Samenow, chief meteorologist of the Washington Post's Capital Weather Gang blog and not a climate change skeptic, said the confrontational rather than educational approach is a misguided one. He also contends it won't achieve the group's aim of changing television meteorologists' opinions about climate change science.

"This confrontational approach is the wrong approach and promises to only further divide TV weathercasters whose views on the issue of climate change are already polarized," Samenow wrote on his blog.

Short-term focus

While meteorologists and climate scientists both study the atmosphere, meteorologists are focused on short-term forecasts of three to five to at most 10 days.

Climate scientists do not study weather, but rather long-term averages over larger areas.

For this reason, Tim Heller at KTRK (Channel 13) said it's not really the place of television meteorologists to communicate climate change information.

"Operational meteorologists and forecasters are not climatologists. The background education is somewhat similar, but our area of expertise is different," he said. "Unfortunately, that doesn't stop some TV weather forecasters from spouting off on the subject."